Tuesday, November 22, 2005

Red Sox - Acquired Beckett and Lowell

Boston Red Sox - Acquired P Josh Beckett and 3B Mike Lowell for SS Hanley Ramirez and P Anibal Sanchez and a player to be named.

A few years ago, the Twins had an impressive glut of outfielders and other weaknesses at the bottom of the rotation and the middle infield (though they didn’t quite realize the extent to which the latter was a weakness). Not all of them or even most of them were stars, but they did have value at the time in filling the team’s holes. But the Twins didn’t do anything. They sat on their strength, whistled Dixie and watched their surplus fade away, none of the value realized. Kielty? One of the few they did trade, but for a player who’s now just as mediocre and much more expensive. Restovich? Lost on waivers. Jones? Likely gone. Hunter? They wish he was gone. Those aren’t the only player.

What does this have to do with the Red Sox? The Twins had a choice either to use the value of players or lose the value of those players. They chose the latter.

Given that Lucchino’s thinking and organizational philosophy has won the day in the Byzantine environment of the Red Sox front office, it seems unlikely that a 1990s Brave mindset will be used for decision-making with the 2000s Yankees mindset being used instead. Young players in this organization are no longer the future stars of tomorrow - well, they may be, but not in Beantown. Now, the future is something to be avoided, the wall mended in place with duct tape instead of mortar.

As such, the Red Sox had to either use Sanchez and Ramirez as players or trade them and get the value that way. Could this look horrible 10 years ago if Sanchez’ arm stays on? Certainly. But it’s better for Sanchez to star in Florida and the Red Sox get Beckett than Sanchez to pitch in Pawtucket for 3 years and watch his trade value go away. Ramirez is a lesser prospect than Sanchez, clearly hyped more than his performance has warranted, and if one wants to win now and damn the future, it’s better to make someone else pay to try and wait and hope for Hanley’s tools to become skills.

One things the Marlins know how to do is commit to a rebuild. The post-1997 firesale was ugly, but just take a look at the post-1997 Orioles to see what a half-ass rebuild does. The Marlins dumped everything, built up a new team, won a World Series and started another rebuild cycle while the O’s haven’t even seen .500 in that span.

2006, this is a great trade for the Red Sox. If you’re going for instant gratification, get something gratifying. And Beckett certainly does that. The constant blister problems are annoying but I’ll take them over constant shoulder problems and the side benefit that Beckett has been very mildly used compared to other very good young pitchers. The question is - now that the Red Sox have crossed the Rubicon, will they now go all the way? Pedroia to Minnesota for Hunter? Lester for Kent? Papelbon for Wily Mo Pena? Youkilis for a random reliever? In for a penny, in for a pound. It’s not how I would personally go about it, but there’s more than one way to win a championship, I guess.

Reader Comments and Retorts

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

I don't see where this deal, itself, really signals a sea change in the Sox philosophy of talent management. It's an excellent opportunity for the Sox to take prospects and turn them into an occasionally dominant pitcher in his prime, not a pitcher who is five years past his peak.

I think that a smart GM can win the Yankee way, the Brave way, the Indian/Marlin way, the A's way, or any gradation in between. You don't need to nail a 95-point personnel manifesto to Bud Selig's door to have a consistent plan that works.

With all of that said, you're probably right that Lucchino isn't the man to find his way to glory using a flexible, mix-n-match talent strategy.

lets face it, it doesn't look like hanley is going to be the blue chip star he's hyped to be. sanchez might be a very a fine pitcher, but beckett is a very fine pitcher now, and the sox have lester and papelbon as well. with pedroia, youks, lester, and papelbon the sox have 4 players who are ready/close to ready for the majors. there's no reason to trade them as they can help during the next couple years when their window of opportunity will be open.

As a Twins fan I'm not happy watching Terry Ryan sitting on his hands again, but I am glad we didn't end up with Lowell. I'm not all that confident that he's going to bounce back all the way, though I have to admit most of that scepticism is based in never having heard why he sucked last year. I know guys have bad years all the time, but it's been a long time since Lowell has been the guy that warrented the huge contract he's carting around today. I looked at him in July and no one knew, and I still haven't read a divorce, disease, dianabol or dimentia story that indicates he'll be anything other than older next spring. It amounts to little more than a feeling in my big toe, but I'm still glad he won't be in MN next season.

I'm hearing a rumor involving Lowell and Twins pitcher Scott Baker. Baker's K numbers look good but not great. He has good control but doesn't appear to prevent HR's much (any?) better than average. Does he have a future? If he does, why is his name being connected with Lowell's?

What does it say about Lowell if that feeling in your big toe is inflamatory gout?

I think that would mean that Cris E is Matt LeCroy. I don't think that affects Lowell, or Frank Tanana.

What happens to Bill Mueller if all this happens?

I don't know, but I think that is a key thing to thin about when you people talk about trading Lowell elsewhere. Mueller is a free agent probably won't get a contract as generous as Lowell's. Getting much in return for him will be hard when there are other good free agent options available.

Why does this trade necessarily have to represent a screw the future front office perspective? Couldn't it be characterized as a prudent recognition that Hanley Ramirez's value would be gone like a wisp of smoke in the wind with any more disappointing minor league play? Would should a wise front office do with a prospect who they're uncertain about but whom another team regards as a sure thing blue chip guy except trade him to them?

This trade is not done by any stretch of the imagination, folks. Ned Colletti is apparently taking a page from the Sabean book and offering Billingsley and Guzman (!). The Marlins would be CRAZY not to back out and do that.

If the Marlins end up as the 2008 World Series Champs, a lot of people are going to look upon their method of scrapping an entire team and rebuliding with rookies as the new "moneyball".

It works well in Baseball Mogul, though the game is easy enough that it is more reloading with rookies than rebuilding. I'm guessing that being a real GM is somewhat tougher than playing a game against computer AI.

Well, considering earlier this past weekend, Blalock/Danks for Beckett/Lowell was reported as a done deal, to be complete by Monday per sources... I'd agree it's a bit too early for Red Sox fans to start celebrating/complaining.

Why does this trade necessarily have to represent a screw the future front office perspective?

I don't get it, either. The only reason we've heard anything other than "potential sleeper" about Ramirez is because he belongs to the Yankees/Mets/Red Sox triumvirate. The odds that Sanchez ever begins to approach Beckett are long to say the least.

Beckett is young, cheap and still has quite a ceiling on him. He's not even close to one of the bigger question marks in the Boston rotation. He's probably Boston's best starter even if he misses five starts with blister trouble.

Done deal or not, if this lands in the Red Sox lap, I think this is a big win, particularly because neither player they receive in the short-term is a 35-year-old making $14 million a year for the next several years. Lowell's making $9 million a year for the next two years and then he's gone; Beckett, meanwhile, is young, has good K rates, lowered his walk rate this year, is liked by scouts as well as statheads, and hasn't been overworked in his youth. Furthermore, Hanley Ramirez is starting to remind me a lot of Freddy Sanchez, the last "budding star" the Sawks nurtured through their system before (wisely) trading him for whatever they could get a couple of years ago.

He struck out 10.9 in A, 9.9 in AA. No way that translates to 10+ in the big leagues.

Well, he'd be facing pitchers in the NL and ProPlayer appears to markedly promote strikeous.

Furthermore, Hanley Ramirez is starting to remind me a lot of Freddy Sanchez, the last "budding star" the Sawks nurtured through their system before (wisely) trading him for whatever they could get a couple of years ago.

I don't think you could pick two more dissimilar prospects than Hanley Ramirez and Freddy Sanchez.

While I find the thought of damning the future in such a way to be very disheartening, I don't think it's quite there yet. The most encouraging thing is that, of the Big Three pitching prospects, Sanchez is the riskiest, but at the same time doesn't have a noticably larger upside than Lester, maybe even Papelbon. Of the marketable prospects, the Sox traded the two most valuable longshots for a young starter who hasn't been noticably overworked and already has postseason success.

Don't get me wrong, I was really high on both Sanchez and Ramirez, but when you get down to it there's a young pitcher and a toolsy player with injury problems and a spotty record. I don't think this is the opening of the floodgates, but I could be wrong.

Unbelievable trade for the Red Sox if it happens. To trade for a 25 year old underworked pitcher and give up only potential in return is amazing. What I don't understand is that the Marlins want to get rid of Lowell so bad they would trade their 2nd best player to help move him. If you don't want him so much why did you sign him? Just a baffling move...

Even just NL champs in '08 or 2009 or 2010 will suffice qualifying "GUTTINGBALL" as the new trendy methodology.

Why wait till '08? The Indians might win in '06 with their team built on guttingball. How do you think they wound up with Sizemore, Westbrook, Crisp, etc? They gutted the 1990s power houses starting in 2002 and now have a new powerhouse.

To me, this move makes a ton of sense for the Marlins. Do the Marlins have a good shot at winning the World Series in the next two seasons? They finished tied with the Mets for third place and are losing their 3rd starter, their best reliever, and their RF. What's the point of keeping Beckett around to pitch 300-400 IP for a team that will in all likelihood not come close to making the playoffs? The Marlins aren't going to be able to afford Beckett when he becomes a FA anyway. Instead of those innings the Marlins are:

1) Saving a ton of money that can be used to sign Cabrera and Willis.
2) Getting two guys who could be part of the next Marlins team that makes the playoffs.

I think teams should do this more often. The only reason they don't is because they are afraid of their fans' reaction. The Marlins don't have to worry about that much because they simply don't draw well. They finished 14th in attendance in the NL in 2004, one year after winning the World Series.

It's a ballsy move by the Marlins, giving up a young World Series MVP. I don't know much about the guys they're getting back, but isn't this similar to Oakland's Hudson and Mulder trades from last year? Florida isn't trying to rebuild on the fly like Oakland was, but they've already shown they can tear down and build up again.

Of course it looks great for Boston too, because they should be able to afford to sign Beckett to a long deal through his prime.

Do the Marlins have a good shot at winning the World Series in the next two seasons?

All depends on what kind of payroll they can truly afford. Willis, Beckett, Delgado, Cabrera, Castillo, Lowell (if he bounces back) are damn fine players. LoDuca and Pierre are roughly average (Pierre's OPS+ stinks but historically he gets on base). If they could bring back Encarnacion (average) and Burnett (or bring in equivalent players), they'd still have an excellent core. And all but two of those guys would be 32 or younger. That would be a team not far from a shot at winning the World Series at all.

So the Red Sox have Papelbon, Wakefield, Arroyo, Miller, Wells, Clement, Schilling, and Beckett as starters?

Beckett lives on the DL. He will continue to have problems. If he notches 130 innings, I'd be surprised. Schilling is finished--Mr. red Light, it's time to go play with your bloody sock and your Nazi memorabelia. Clement will rebound from his shaky ending, if he can maintain decent control. Wells is sure to win at least 12 games. Wakefield is the most valuable guy here: he could pitch every three days and still come out of the bullpen on days off. Oh, and Lowell is pure liability. Since the drug testing, his numbers rolled off the table; he couldn't make the starting lineup on the 1962 Mets.

"Boston Herald: "According to baseball sources, the Sox and Florida Marlins have agreed in principle on a deal that would bring Josh Beckett and third baseman Mike Lowell to Boston for prized shortstop prospect Hanley Ramirez and minor league right-handers Anibal Sanchez and Jesus Delgado."

If you line them up that way they are very comparable pitchers. Strikeouts, walks, the entire package. I can't possibly see what Dan is talking about this being a trade for the present. Odds are Beckett is going to be a better pitcher than Sanchez ten years from now. Beckett is less than four years older than Anibal Sanchez.

Jesus Delgado is a toolsy LHP with some injury issues that the Sox started grooming to be a reliever this season. He was 21 this year and repeated Low-A, where he probably should have done better. He did well enough for his age and experience level in the AFL to get added to the 40-man roster, though.

Wakefield is the most valuable guy here: he could pitch every three days and still come out of the bullpen on days off.

While I don't necessarily disagree with the first part of the statement, I gotta call BS on the seond half. We hear this crap all the time, but the fact is that throwing 100 or more pitches, even if they're mostly knuckleballs, is anything but effortless. And 60 mph is probably harder than most of the people who write this kind of stuff could throw their best fastball. Wakefield can start every five days and pitch in relief on one day in between, but I suspect that most starters could do that if they really wanted to.

Re: Lowell and the "fact" he is done. Your comments about Lowell could have been taken word for word and applied to Bill Mueller when the Red Sox acquired him. He was 31 and had had a poor year (though much better than Lowell's).

We hear this crap all the time, but the fact is that throwing 100 or more pitches, even if they're mostly knuckleballs, is anything but effortless.

The knuckleball also requires Wakefield to use a different motion than normal pitchers. Just because he's throwing an 80 mph fastball (or whatever) doesn't mean that it's not just as much work for him as another pitcher throwing a 95 mph fastball.

Lowell had 500 ABs and only 58 RBIs. For a "power man," or even an "average man," that blows. His worst enemy is the new drug policy. David Eckstein knocked in 61, Mark Grudzielanek had 59 RBIs. Christ, even Julio Lugo had 57 RBIs. Lowell is a liability.

Just because he's throwing an 80 mph fastball (or whatever) doesn't mean that it's not just as much work for him as another pitcher throwing a 95 mph fastball.

I'm pretty sure that knuckleballers need as much rest between starts as any other pitcher, but throwing a knuckleball is a lot less un-natural and stressful than, say, throwing a slider. They're at a much lower injury risk, and they can work deeper into games without fear of wearing down.

The White Sox just added a knuckleballer, Charles Haeger, to their 40-man. I hope he gets a look at some point - I like knuckleballers.

This is a great trade for the RS. They are about the "rings" and Beckett has been a legit postseason ace. That's worth more to them than to other teams. He's young and likely to be bordering on great for years to come. Lowell can't be worse than last year and if he is so what--the RS can afford it a bad contract.

It's got some risk: Beckett's shoulder could give out and Hanley could become not just a good, but a great, player. In terms of tools, Hanley is one of the most talented players in pro ball. Now, tools aren't performance, but if you'd seen Hanley play, you'd understand why he's been so highly rated. My sense is that he'll never reach his potential because he cannot sustain his performance over the long haul. He's excelled right after a call-up or in big games and been mediocre for the remainder. Plus, Hanley is blocked by Renteria.

Sanchez could be good, but he is clearly behind JonPapi and Lester. I see him as a #3 at best. He's tradeable.

I'm not saying that Beckett is Pedro, but this reminds me of the Armas/ Pavano deal for Pedro. 2 grade A prospects for a big league ace.

Great move for the sox (again). Coincidentally, both times without Theo (and I don't mean this as a knock in any way).

Re: Lowell and the "fact" he is done. Your comments about Lowell could have been taken word for word and applied to Bill Mueller when the Red Sox acquired him. He was 31 and had had a poor year (though much better than Lowell's).

That would be the year after he busted his knee running into a wall in Chicago. My big toe is comfortable with the injury explaining the rough following year. Lowell didn't miss any games and I still haven't heard any reasons for the downturn, so I'm not convinced a team on a tight budget should be betting on a rebound. I understand bad years happen, but he was awful last season.

Enough already about Beckett being an "ace"! Please. He has 41 career wins over 5 years. . . . an average of 8.2 per year. Last year, yet another injury ladened season for Beckett, was his best year and he only pitched 178 innings. That's an ace? The pitcher he is "most similar to" at age 25, is Lynn McGlothen. A fine pitcher, but hardly an ace; his career W-L was 86-93, but at least McGlothen managed to pitch over 200 innings in 4 seasons. Beckett hasn't done it once.

No way. This guy has never pitched over 160 innings, until last year (he only hit 178). Now, after 5 years of averaging 121 innings per season, he hits 208? Shyaa. He's been on the DL 9 times in 4 years.

Catfish, that's his translated pitching line for 2005. It's not translated to fenway, though, but to some imaginary context:

Converts all pitching statistics into a standard context. Pitchers are translated to a league where the top five pitchers (in innings) pitch an average of 275 innings. An average pitcher will have rates, per nine innings, of 9.00 hits, 1.00 home run, 3.00 walks, 6.00 strikeouts, and 4.50 earned runs. In the standard context, a replacement level pitcher has a 6.00; the translation is set up to conserve runs above replacement (alltime PRAR). Wins and losses are set using the pythagorean formula with average run support, with the pitcher's actual deviation from his real expected win percentage added back in.

I thought Beckett's biggest problem was staying off the DL, but not according to ESPN's scouting report:

"His biggest problem remains his bursts of anger when things go wrong on the mound. He still struggles to put bad pitches and bad calls behind him and tends to brood, sometimes for days, after disappointing outings."

catfish, I assume you're a yankee fan, no? shouldn't you be worried that the sox are upgrading so much going into next year (while the yankees can't even get a free agent to return their calls?) instead of gloating over beckett's perceived emotional problems?

Sanchez could be good, but he is clearly behind JonPapi and Lester. I see him as a #3 at best. He's tradeable.

IMHO Sanchez has the highest upside of the trio actually. You're not going to find any holes in his numbers this year. But I'm not sure why the injury risk floats around with his name either. He's only had TJ surgery...nothing with the shoulder.

He's also about neutral, or maybe just leaning towards being a flyball pitcher and calling Pro Player home never hurts in the HR department.

shouldn't you be worried that the sox are upgrading so much going into next year (while the yankees can't even get a free agent to return their calls?) instead of gloating over beckett's perceived emotional problems?

Nah. Beckett has averaged only 121 inning over 5 years . . . on the DL 9 times in 4 years. No threat. And Lowell? Hah. A bum. 58 RBIs in 500 ABs. Little Freddie Patek smacked in 60 RBIs in 497 ABs one year. Lowell is a liability. I hope to see him in their lineup.

All depends on what kind of payroll they can truly afford. Willis, Beckett, Delgado, Cabrera, Castillo, Lowell (if he bounces back) are damn fine players. LoDuca and Pierre are roughly average (Pierre's OPS+ stinks but historically he gets on base). If they could bring back Encarnacion (average) and Burnett (or bring in equivalent players), they'd still have an excellent core. And all but two of those guys would be 32 or younger. That would be a team not far from a shot at winning the World Series at all.

The Marlins have three young pitchers - Olsen, Johnson, and Vargas - plus Hermida and maybe Willingham that they can slot into their lineup, so they can get rid of some of a lot of the salary without too much pain. The proposed Lowell/Beckett trade addresses an organizational weakness by adding Hanley Ramirez as the SS of the future, allowing them to finally cut Alex Gonzalez adrift. There are also some rumors that Pierre could be traded, with Eric Reed (a Pierre clone, except that he's white) possibly slotting into CF.

Levski, why is he using translated pitching stats as a starting point?

He starts with Prospectus' translated stats. The benefit of that is he doesn't have to translate everybody to a neutral context first; he can rely on Davenport to do that, and presumably Davenport does it better than he could. The downside is that he starts with Davenport's context, and doesn't adjust to a realistic 2006 context (he does a park adjustment, but that's it). If you use his projections exclusively, it doesn't matter because they're all relative. But if you just see one projection, it's going to be off (mostly on the innings).

Never distrust statistics my friend. He was nursing a hampered wing. Poor fella. Seemed to have some promise, yet, the injury bug always seemed to get him. Strangely enough, the bug seemed to find its way clear up the youngeters rear quarters, causing a two pronged dilemma: Extended time on the DL and nuclear emotional flairups. Perhaps the hampered chap could use some ointment and a few sessions with Dr. Nazi Schilling . . . perhaps he might come around.

IMHO Sanchez has the highest upside of the trio actually. You're not going to find any holes in his numbers this year. But I'm not sure why the injury risk floats around with his name either. He's only had TJ surgery...nothing with the shoulder.

His elbow operation wasn't TJ -- a nerve in his arm was giving him trouble and he had surgery to fix it.